Dhanlaxmi Chandu Vs Town Planning and Acquisition Officer (Bombay High Court) Facts- It is alleged by Samina Arif Khan @ Dhanlaxmi Chandrakant Devrukhkar (‘Samina’) to place the Intervention Application for urgent hearing and orders since according to Samina, Advocate Shri Rohan Barge and Notary – Shri S.M. Naqvi alongwith an unknown person have filed Writ […]
Where notice under section 148 was issued to a non-existing entity as said entity ceased to exist at the time of the issue of the notice on account of merger; the said notice was liable to be quashed and it was not an error that could be corrected under section 292B.
MSL Group India & Anr. Vs Eknath Narayan Shelar (Bombay High Court) Re-structuring of the organisation or resizing of the labour force does not give liberty to an employer to dispense with the services of all the employees and recruit fresh hands in their place – Bombay High Court It is an admitted position that […]
Macrotech Developers Limited Vs ACIT (Bombay High Court) The question is whether there was a failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for the assessment of Assessment Year 2012-13. It is not the case that there is failure on the part of the assessee to make […]
Mahle Anand Termal Systems Pvt. Ltd. Vs Union of India (Bombay High Court) In this case petitioner made inadvertent errors in GSTR-1 form wherein GSTN number of the recipient of goods was mentioned incorrectly. Leading to denial of credit to the recipient. Time limit for rectification expired. Supplier made representations, however, remained unanswered. The Hon’ble […]
Rohan Developers Pvt. Ltd. Vs ITO (Bombay High Court) According to petitioner, under Section 49(1)(ii) of the Act, cost of acquisition of the said property in the hands of seller is deemed to be the cost for which the said property was acquired by late Mrs. Dolly Jehangir Gazdar. It is also petitioner’s case that […]
Munish Rajkumar Mahajan Vs Union of India (Bombay High Court) This Court held that having regard to the objective of the scheme, in a case of this nature, a reasonable and pragmatic approach has to be adopted so that a declarant can avail the benefits of the scheme; a declarant who seeks benefit under the […]
Globus Petroadditions Pvt. Ltd. Vs UOI (Bombay High Court) A perusal of the Order passed by the Assistant Commissioner indicates that he has refused to comply with the Order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals-II) by recording reasons as to why the said Order cannot be complied with as if the Assistant Commissioner was sitting in […]
Glaxosmithkline Pharmaceuticals Ltd. Vs ACIT/DCIT (Bombay High Court) Admittedly, this is a case where the notice under Section 148 of the Act has been issued after the expiry of 4 years from the end of the relevant assessment year and assessment under Section 143(3) of the Act has also been completed. Hence, proviso to Section […]
Tata Sons Limited Vs DCIT (Bombay High Court) This is a case where the scrutiny assessment was completed and order under section 143(3) of the Act has been passed followed by a rectification order under section 154 of the Act. Therefore Petitioner’s case has been considered at two stages, (i) When the assessment order was […]
